Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Jaldani Venkata Rao vs The State Of Ap on 14 February, 2020
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITON NO.3546 of 2020
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"to issue a writ or direction preferably Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein in contemplating to dispossess the petitioners herein forcibly from the lands in an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in Survey No.161/11, Ac.0.13 cents in Survey No.161/3 and Ac.0.06 cents in Survey No.161/1, situated at Manjeru Village, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violation of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner herein from the lands in an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in Survey No.161/11, Ac.0.13 cents in Survey No.161/3 and Ac.0.06 cents in Survey No.161/1, situated at Manjeru Village, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District".
2. Though the petitioners made several allegations in the writ affidavit filed along with the writ petition, the truth or otherwise in those allegations need not be adjudicated by this Court, in view of the submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue that the respondent authorities will follow due process of law.
3. In Rame Gowda (D) By Lrs vs M. Varadappa Naidu (D) By Lrs. & Anr1, Ram Rattan v. State of Uttar Pradesh2 and Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration3, the Supreme Court held as follows:-
1
(2004) 1 Supreme Court Cases 769 2 1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299 3 1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 2 "...to forcibly dispossess citizens of their private property, without following the due process of law, would be to violate a human right, as also the constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution."
4. Recording submission of the learned Assistant Government for Revenue, as there is no proposal to interfere with the possession of the subject land, and in view of the judgments of Apex Court referred above, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps, except by due process of law.
5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with the consent of both the counsel. However, this order will not preclude the respondents to take appropriate steps, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 14-02-2020 KA 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITON NO.3486 of 2020 Date: 14-02-2020 Note: Issue CC by 20-02-2020.
B/o.
KA